Mangal Singh vs State of Punjab

M.M. Aggarwal, J.—This is a petition against the judgment dated 8.7.1989 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction for the offence u/s 61(c)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act (hereinafter referred to be as "the Act") had been dismissed.

The case of the prosecution against the present petitioner was that on 6.7.1985, police party headed by H.CJasbir Singh was present in the village Thatha where secret information was received that the accused was distilling illicit liquor by means of working still outside the western wall near the tube well of one Pritpal Singh and if raid was conducted the accused was likely to be arrested while operating the working still. Then police party went there to join independent witnesses but none came forward. Raid was conducted and the accused was found distilling illicit liquor. He was feeding the fire under the hearth at that time of raid. A sample of illicit liquor was separated from the receiver whereas drum boiler Ex.P 1 and the other articles of the working still were taken in possession after completing formalities. Drum boiler Ex.Pl containing Iahan was tested by Jagdish Lal, E.I.(PW2) on the next day and the same were found to be partly distilled fit for further distillation. Then the challan was presented against the accused.

The accused-petitioner Mangal Singh faced trial. The case was found to be duly proved. He was accordingly convicted and sentenced to undergo R.1. for one and half year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default of fine, he was to undergo R.I. for six months by the court of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Tarn Taran. Appeal filed by the present petitioner against that judgment had been dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.

There had been concurrent findings of the guilt of the accused recorded by the J.M.I.C.Tarn Taran and the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner did not contest these findings but had pointed out that the occurrence is of dated 6.7.1985. The Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Tarn Taran had convicted the accused on 15.7.1988 and the age of the accused as recorded is sixty six years and that almost twenty years have passed when the occurrence took place and by this time, the accused-petitioner must be aged about 85 years. It was prayed that a lenient view be taken in the matter.

In view of the fact that no arguments have been addressed as far as conviction is concerned and there is concurrent finding against the accused-petitioner, the appeal as far as conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Sections 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act is dismissed.

From the record, it would come out that the accused had already undergone sentence of about two months as under trial prisoner or after his conviction. Since, he may now be 85 years of age, I take a lenient view in the matter and hold that the interest of justice would be met if the petitioner is sentenced to the extent the period already undergone. Order accordingly. The petitioner shall undergo the sentence of imprisonment in default of fine, if the fine is not already paid or deposited.

Criminal Revision stands disposed of.